On Preempted’s query, I assume 3C 3H 3N suggests a D stop. It does suggest a need to have some discipline when pre-empting especially in 2nd seat. It really won’t help if a hand like Ax x QJx J10xxxxx is opened 3C as is xx x xxx KQJ9xxx. Reese suggested there is a case for mixing things up sometimes but there are limits.
Regards
Iain
bobbywolffAugust 4th, 2024 at 8:29 pm
Hi Iain,
Never contradict your partnership, unless it is likely to work and, you feel it is the right
gamble. The above sentence is probably the right discipline and especially so voiced
once it is tried, but failed. Partnerships need to stay focused on allowing gambles when
and if, either of the partners, think it is right.
The above caveat, though not often lived up to, is, at least, to me, about the correct
discipline needed, but not to be immediately judged, regardless of the result, should also be ever present!
bobbywolffAugust 4th, 2024 at 8:53 pm
Hi again Iain,
I would not offer an opinion as to what constitutes the exactly type hand needed to preempt, except to say that methinks there should not be any major nor minor disagreement as to the type hand to follow through. Therein can be, among the best partnerships ever to play together, wide disparities as to what a classic preempt looks like,
but, at least IMO that, in itself will (or should) ever be even a semblance of a good idea
to split.
That goes to the heart of what I think top level bridge consists of, there are many
situations to which one or the other vastly different views taken might work, allowing that
partnership to decide on what to do, at the apex, to which no one player, or his partner
can speak absolutely as to what should be done, simply because, even at the top level of bridge, will not guess right (nor wrong) more than the law of averages will allow.
AND WHO IS TO SAY WHAT THOSE VASTLY DIFFERENT CHOICES WILL PRODUCE, AGAINST
THE SPECIFIC PAIR SITTING THE OTHER WAY. The only caveat left to follow, is that both
partners need to be extremely careful who they choose to go to war with.
Subscribe to our feed
Bridge-related
Hi Bobby,
On Preempted’s query, I assume 3C 3H 3N suggests a D stop. It does suggest a need to have some discipline when pre-empting especially in 2nd seat. It really won’t help if a hand like Ax x QJx J10xxxxx is opened 3C as is xx x xxx KQJ9xxx. Reese suggested there is a case for mixing things up sometimes but there are limits.
Regards
Iain
Hi Iain,
Never contradict your partnership, unless it is likely to work and, you feel it is the right
gamble. The above sentence is probably the right discipline and especially so voiced
once it is tried, but failed. Partnerships need to stay focused on allowing gambles when
and if, either of the partners, think it is right.
The above caveat, though not often lived up to, is, at least, to me, about the correct
discipline needed, but not to be immediately judged, regardless of the result, should also be ever present!
Hi again Iain,
I would not offer an opinion as to what constitutes the exactly type hand needed to preempt, except to say that methinks there should not be any major nor minor disagreement as to the type hand to follow through. Therein can be, among the best partnerships ever to play together, wide disparities as to what a classic preempt looks like,
but, at least IMO that, in itself will (or should) ever be even a semblance of a good idea
to split.
That goes to the heart of what I think top level bridge consists of, there are many
situations to which one or the other vastly different views taken might work, allowing that
partnership to decide on what to do, at the apex, to which no one player, or his partner
can speak absolutely as to what should be done, simply because, even at the top level of bridge, will not guess right (nor wrong) more than the law of averages will allow.
AND WHO IS TO SAY WHAT THOSE VASTLY DIFFERENT CHOICES WILL PRODUCE, AGAINST
THE SPECIFIC PAIR SITTING THE OTHER WAY. The only caveat left to follow, is that both
partners need to be extremely careful who they choose to go to war with.